Well, how they say, thats the way the cookie crumbles, for the little guy, that is. When the infringement is done by the big guys, well, its the other way around. The cookie never crumbles.

In the case of the massive infringements of the worst kind (the theft of over 500 not the use of one song) against our family owned songs, it cost us over $250,000 to get awards of $21,000 in damages against the infringers ($4 per stolen song per year).

If you cannot believe it, see here:
http://rafa_venegas.web.prdigital.com/awardcosts.htm

Well, that’s the way the cookie crumbles. Reason has nothing to do with the laws and the legal system. Corruption does.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

They will give you some song and dance about giving out how they get the info will provide infringers with a method of getting around being identified. Somehow I don’t think that is the case.

You’ve got people facing ruination, falsely accused, and it shows up quite regularly that the **AAs don’t have the info they claim they do when push comes to a shove. Most often when the case looks like it is going to backfire, they want to run off, stop trying the case, and expect the victim to just lose the money they had to spend on these frivolous cases to defend themselves. Money they would never have spent had it not been for the necessary costs of defense in fighting for the clearing of their good names by these slanderous cases.

Most often these cases seem to be tried in the public media long before it ever goes to court. Something you never, ever, see being done in criminal cases. This sort of slipshod releasing of “proclaimed facts” without actual backup seems to be more the rule than the exception. It smacks of vigilante type methods and the only thing remaining to do is the string em up part if you read and listen to the media. Some how to me that isn’t what court is supposed to be about. I was under the impression that it was a matter of proof, evidence, and that heresy didn’t come into play in justice.

Even more amazing to me has been the **AAs whining about how they are getting a black smear by all the public opinion. Well the public read it in the papers before it goes to court, they read that mothers with children, dead people, people without computers, people without a technical computer background, finding out they are part of the fodder for the sue em all grist mill. That “the suits” are unfeeling, unsympathizing, and almost inhuman when it comes to what they are willing to do.

That if they lose the original case then it goes on and on as long as one kid in the family hasn’t been blamed yet in court. It’s like catching a case of VD from the internet. They become the scourge of the community because they had an internet connection and their neighbors found out about it in the newspapers.

Amazing to me is that these “products” sell for 99¢ yet they want $750 bucks per infringement. Seems they don’t have to prove how many times it was downloaded and don’t have to show the proof. Think maybe I could sell that seaside resort in Arizona 750 times?